mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
Campus Kangaroo Courts
‘Yes Means Yes’ in the Empire State
Features Icon
show comments
  • fastrackn1

    Another example of what happens when a civilization gets to soft and comfortable, and doesn’t know what to do with it’s time…it looks for anything to pick at and change.

    What we need is a massive solar storm to knock out the electrical grid for a few years so we can all get back to our true nature as beings….

  • rheddles

    Why are college students being discriminated against like this? These rules should be applied to K-12.

    • FriendlyGoat

      They will be—–as a social norm.

    • jwz

      They will also be applied from the age of 21-90. You will see middle aged females seeking a divorce from their husbands, testifying to that one time years ago when looking back on it now, they decided their withdrawing their consent.

  • wigwag

    These regulations are going to backfire on feminists. With the definition of what constitutes a sexual act so unclear, it will be just as easy for men to accuse women of sexual misconduct as it will be for women to make the same accusations against men. It’s strains credulity for a man to accuse a woman of rape, but if the putative sexual act in question is touching, kissing, petting or even just assertive wooing, accusations of sexual misconduct will become a two way street. The “he said-she said” phenomena could easily escalate out of control. Feminists should be careful what they wish for.

    There has always been a puritanical streak to feminism; after all, the temperance movement which led to prohibition is the progenitor of American feminism. Feminism took on a new look in the 1960s; back then it was all about bra burning and free-love. I guess what goes around, comes around.

    • johngbarker

      “Innocent child care workers” usually did not have wealthy and influential parents to protect their interests. Universities have picked a strange way to spend their endowments.

    • jwz

      Another funny thing about all this is, that these laws have also drafted within them “withholding of sex and affection upon demand” as another example of sexual assault.

      I think what will make this explode in the SJWs faces are when heterosexuals start accusing gays of unwanted nonconsensual attention- looks, comments, touches. You’ll see so many college administrators doing their best Jackie Gleason imitation– hommina-hommina-hommina.

  • jeburke

    Even analyzing this is stupid. It is madness, pure and simple, but tells a great deal about the descent of the Democratic Party.

  • CapitalHawk

    It is interesting to witness the morphing of feminists from those women advocating that women can do as they like with their bodies into women advocating that we aren’t being nearly Victorian enough in our view of sexual relations.

    That aside, I am excited about these laws being passed in multiple states. I mean, who wouldn’t relish the spectacle of the President of the United States being charged with pedophilia because (1) yes means yes and (2) the baby he just kissed at the re-election rally did not affirmatively consent. Think of the possibilities people!

  • Matt B

    Please folks, this is just another step forward as we work out the nuances of human sexuality. Remember that sex was only discovered in the 1960’s, and we’ve learned a lot since then. Just like drugs, we know now that adults can safely engage in sex, but it needs to be regulated.

    Problems with the current laws are that “consent” is imprecise, and without witnesses there will always be disputes. So for a start, the laws will need to be expanded to require some formal language to eliminate any ambiguity, and these formal statements must be made in front of at least one witness. I’m just spitballing here, but I’m thinking of something like this:

    “Dearly beloved: We have come together in the presence of God to witness and bless the joining together of this man and this woman…”. If you think about it, if both partners are willing participants and they get a friend or two to be the witnesses, this formal exchange could become a really sweet thing. We’d be building a “ritual” around sex to ensure that it stays within bounds that are good for society in general.
    I think the discovery of sex was a good thing, and I sure don’t want to go back to the old days. Forward into the future!

  • FriendlyGoat

    When party of the third part (casual observer or campus enforcer of possible infractions) sees Person A and Person B holding hands on a street, said party of the third part is to count to ten while carefully observing for any visible signs coercion, dragging, kidnapping, resisting, or facial expressions of distress. If aforementioned party of the third part registers no such indications of a crime in progress, said party is to mind his or her own business (but write a report in personal diary, a classified document, the contents of which cannot be disclosed.)

    • CapitalHawk

      This is a good idea, but I think we should take it further. Video monitoring of the population should be vastly expanded so as to be able to always verify that affirmative consent was given. I recall there was a book written about this ideal future (called 1984, if I recall correctly) in which the good guys were often heard to utter “We have always been at war with Rape Culture!”

      • FriendlyGoat

        I’m gonna suggest we skip the video unless and until the would-be video viewers are also 48 years dead.

    • Tom

      Because, as we all know, you deal with wolves by gelding all canines.

  • michaelmobius1

    The people responsible for this should die barren

  • Zach Barclift

    Curious that all the affirmative consent nay sayers conventiently forgot to mention that this has been the policy of the Armed Forces for the better part of a decade or more.

    What are we protesting here, the possible abuse of the law? I surely don’t want to see anyone go to jail for sexual assault that doesn’t merit it, but the popularly cited figures from the FBI in 1997 hold true to today: Less than 8% of all reported rapes per year are closed as unfounded. This is a good metric to remember when you consider how this law is going to play out.

    This law empowers victims, encourages would be offenders to think twice about their actions, and takes serious steps towards combatting the societal shame rape victims feel that keeps them from reporting. If it is successfully implemented you will see sexual assault reports go up; that means the law is working, and that is a good thing.

    • Philthy

      Yeah, the sturm und drang this whole thing is causing in certain quarters leaves me SMH.

    • Tom

      I thought the mantra of the left was that it was better that a hundred guilty go free than one innocent be jailed.
      Apparently when the feminists want something done, that doesn’t apply.

  • towerclimber37

    this is EXCELLENT!!! it means far fewer casual sexual liasons will happen, thereby curbing the pregnancy rates of unwed women. that will drop abortion rates too…bravo!

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service